http://metro.co.uk/2016/05/02/why-are-video-game-critics-so-angry-readers-feature-5850203/
>the comments
>>336241789
>question as headline
into the trash it goes
>>336241789
Wanna know why critics are so angry? Because it attracts far more viewers. Le angry yelling man has been an easy gimmick since AVGN popularized it.
Sterling also understands that people like drama and controversies. He feeds off of that for viewers by making sure his videos/articles have some sort of controversy to them. Some sort of opinion that he likes to claim as fact to stir up readers and create a buzz.
It pisses me off really. And hell Totalbiscuit of all people called out this type of journalism in a recent video. Kinda ironic given how much he used to feed off of drama, but it's great to see him moving away from that.
>>336241789
Yahtzee really fucking outshines jim in almost every positive trait that you can attribute to him
>>336241789
I'm not much into gaming review websites or whatever the fuck they're called, but can somebody answer me some questions.
1. Why the fuck would you, as a "journalist", EVER pour your own biased opinion into an article, isn't that the exact opposite of reporting?
2. Is there a huge amount of people who read this page?
It feels to me like some angry blogger wrote this article and somehow it made it onto the site.
>>336241789
Jim Sterling is a fat, ugly, pretentious cunt who genuinely doesn't know shit about videogames
>>336241789
No u
>>336244381
shut the fuck up, total biscuit is anything BUT moving away from being a drama whore
>>336245364
Only going by what he said. Whether he will or not remains to be seenHe probably won't
>>336245119
All video game "critics" are fucking idiots that don't know shit about video games. It's depressing how many views these guys get. You'd be better off reading a random shit poster's opinion.
>>336245117
>It feels to me like some angry blogger wrote this article and somehow it made it onto the site.
That's exactly what happened, didn't the 'Readers Feature' part of the title clue you in?
>>336245117
Non of these game sites have "journalists" on staff. They only want contrarian click baiters to drive page hits
Critics are angry because video games are bad
>>336241789
I like Game Central but their readers features are normally shit
>>336241789
>Jim Sterling will die from obesity related illness in your lifetime
FEELS GOOD NIGGA
>>336241789
These people are not game critics, they're fucking misrable whiners that think they have some influence because of a subscriber count that they got with almost no effort.
Because if you make calm and reasonable points that most people agree with, nobody cares. Why would you?
This is why online only extremist opinions seem to exist. Calm, reasonable, majority held opinions are either not forwarded because they're boring or nobody would listen anyway.
Simple as that.
So only angry, shouting people are heard. The only problem is losers who spend their entire lives online thinking the internet is the real world and somehow representative of how ACTUAL society acts or thinks.
/thread
>/threading your own post
You're god damn right.
/thread
>>336245117
Videogame journalism is a joke, news at 11. Videogame players are too stupid and childish to want anything better than clickbait headlines, opinions as facts, pure and simple lies, and all the rest.
>>336243860
>very funny with his random humour
Why are normies so shit at identifying "funny"?
"Ha BBT is a funny show!"
>>336246974
Funny is subjective
>>336241789
How long until reviewers are completely cucked by Youtube to the point where vidya publishers just give Youtubers games to do the previewing with rather than reviewers to review?
I can see it happening fairly soonish, seen as the only reviews that get hits are the ones that dare to rate a game less than 8/10
>>336241789
>starting with a rhetorical question
Ohhhh boy, here we go!
Well the writer states the blatantly obvious to anyone with a brain cell left after playing all that vidya.
Controversy gets attention. It really is that simple.
The Jimquisition exits on controversy, it's the very basis of the show. He's not a reviewer, he doesn't get a game on the show and review it, he has an opinion on an event or developer and shares it. Maybe what he did to digital homicide was a little to far, but it was so easy for him to get views doing it. Digital Homicide are a group of morons with no talent, it's totally exploitable.
>>336246820
You're right, Anon! We should do something about this!
>>336246542
>>336246020
These posts are all you need to know, any other post is useless except maybe >>336246639 for extra info.
Please Hiro, if you care at all about this board you will create /vc/ - Video Game Culture and save us from these cancer threads.
>>336247138
Soon. Really fucking soon. Nintendo will be the first, then bigger publishers like Activision will follow. They'd rather have a month long hype fest on various Youtube channels than a few days hype on IGN/Polygon/etc
>>336247147
>>336247131
Funny is objectively constructed at identifying inconsistencies and odd things in situations and people
Normies find introspection and calculation "funny" because they're fucking dumb.
>>336246639
How about not /threading your post but instead, post more of the qt without booty?
>>336243860
>Markiplier (funny guy, plays some interesting obscure games)
>interesting obscure games
>>336247147
All GG did is give sites a target to point at whenever things don't go their way
People don't like your shitty reviews? GG
People don't like your shitty OP ed? GG
People don't like your shitty attitude on Twitter? GG
Honestly, GG was the ONE fucking chance at fixing this shit and they let the media dictate how it was going to play out. GG wasn't offensive enough, it played the defence and reactionary far too much.
>>336243997
whats wrong with that?
>>336247509
Ok cupcake. Enjoy your secret club you special snowflake.
>>336248002
You're fucking stupid if you find BBT funny. It's as simple as that.
I'm sorry your mom dropped you on the head or you have some form of microencephaly. There are treatment options to alleviate your conditions.
>>336247878
Not that guy, but you don't start any article with a question as headline
People are reading articles to (hopefully) get educated and not to get questions thrown at them or get opinions shoved up their asses.
Unfortunately that's not true for """"""games journalism"""""" since they're no journalists. It's quite funny because it's a no brainer when you actually study journalism to NOT out a question in the title.
>>336241789
I commented.
Sterling makes for a rather unappealing read because his angry style doe's a lot to distract from inability to to make a decent point without resorting to a mix of strawmen and hyperbolic and uninformative statements, like, "it plays like a spastic on an escalator" or, "I could stick my finger up my ass and produce better" not exact quote but pretty close to what you find in a Jim Sterling review.
I'm not saying that overly negative reviews are bad
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdNhwb7iuI4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UScsme8didI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qAjK7wd5QE
Or that I expect my reviews to explain themselves via a mini documentary
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPz-dAgXS1s
but read a Sterling and more often your find a fairly basic statement, EG "it's shit" and maybe a few vague statements about why it is, usually backup with Sterlings mix of self-propelled memes and crude but rarely clever humor.
>>336247878
Not the guy you're replying to, but it feels like sensational bullshit whenever you put a question like that in the headline.
It gives the illusion that the writer's presupposition about whatever its is they are discussing is already right and you're just discussing why it's right. You aren't discussing things as they actually are.
Think of it this way. What grabs your attention more?
1. "Local man investigated for alleged indecency with a child was a gamer."
2. "Why are gamers pedophiles?"
>>336241789
>Digital Homicide reacted atrociously to Sterling’s initial video about their game The Slaughtering Grounds, but Sterling could’ve easily ignored it. Instead he chose to escalate matters, even resorting to personal insults, and things reached the point where he ended up sued for ‘libel and slander’
Okay, that whole paragraph is a complete lie.
If anything they started with the libel and slander, and if anyone claims he could have easily ignored it is a hypocrite, who will immediately react aggressively to being called one.
The whole article is as derivative about the whole thing as the arngry youtubers are about being angry about videogames, because the people who watch/read crave cheap drama.
The author is just the latest leech in a line of leeches.
